Obama in personal phone call to Sandra Fluke: Your parents should be proud

posted at 3:40 pm on March 2, 2012 by Tina Korbe

The president clearly thinks it’s advantageous to keep conservatives preoccupied with his contraception mandate because he sure ensures the topic stays in the spotlight. Today, he did that with a rare personal phone call to Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown law student who earlier this week testified in support of the mandate by saying that she and her peers are “going broke” to buy birth control.

In response to Fluke’s congressional testimony, radio host Rush Limbaugh called the Georgetown coed a “slut” and a “prostitute.” With those comments, he touched off a larger controversy. The DCCC and Emily’s List raised funds off Rush’s comments, while Congressional Democrats immediately demanded that Republican leadership disavow his words. House Speaker John Boehner did so tepidly, calmly calling Limbaugh’s remarks “inappropriate,” while also condemning any attempt to use his provocative rhetoric as a fundraising tool.

Today, Obama decided to weigh in, as well, calling Fluke to praise and encourage her and to say her parents should be proud of her activism.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said, “The president called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke because he wanted to offer his support, express his disappointment, that she was the subject of an inappropriate personal attack and thank her for exercising her rights as a citizen to speak out on public policy.”

Carney said they spoke “for several minutes. It was a good conversation. Like a lot of people said the personal attacks directed her way are inappropriate. The fact that political discourse has become debased in many ways is bad enough. It’s worse when directed at a private citizen simply expressing her views on a matter of public policy.”

Asked what Obama thought about Limbaugh’s comments, Carney said, “They were reprehensible. They were disappointing. It is reprehensible that those kinds of personal and crude attacks could be leveled at someone like this young law school student who was simply expressing her opinion on a matter of public policy and doing it with a great deal of poise.”

Fluke also relayed the substance of the call to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell. (Incidentally, Fluke might not be the wide-eyed, 23-year-old she purports to be; sounds like she had the intention to raise this issue before she ever enrolled at Georgetown.)

(Also, note that, according to the lower third in the video, conservative backlash to the contraception mandate amounts to a “War on Women’s Health.” How far we’ve come from the first days after the mandate, when conservatives more successfully framed the issue as Obama’s “War on Religious Freedom.”)

Amid his reaction though, Rush makes a great point. He says that he has been asked why he was so insulting to Fluke. He responded by making the point that his whole “free contraception” movement, on top of the “rich aren’t paying their fair share” movement is highly insulting to him. He likened it to a woman he didn’t know knocking on his door asking for money for contraception because she wanted to go and have sex with 3 guys that evening. Rush explains:

“Where is it written that when all of a sudden if you want something and don’t have the money for it, somebody else has to pay for it. I think the whole notion of being insulted here – there are a lot of us insulted by this whole idea that is growing throughout the Obama administration, that the people who make this country work are somehow doing their fair share, not paying their fair share, that we have to be punished even more. Here’s the latest example of it.”

Of course he ends the segment by suggesting, tongue-in-cheek, that he is waiting for Bill Clinton to call Sandra Fluke to see if she’s OK. Ha!

Dare I suggest that, somewhere along the line, this has gotten a bit — to borrow a word from Ron Paul — “silly“? Don’t misunderstand me: The contraception mandate is very, very serious. As conservatives have said from Day One, it represents an unconscionable assault on religious freedom. Similarly, sexual morality is a very serious issue. But this has become nothing more than a top-my-trauma contest, in which both sides attempt to make it sound as though they’ve been more seriously insulted than the other side.

Let’s not forget who started all of this. Nobody ever threatened to take away anybody’s contraception. Nobody (except George Stephanopoulous) was even talking about contraception until the administration reiterated its mandate to religiously-affiliated employers to provide insurance coverage that covers contraception against their religious beliefs.

The president knew what he was doing when he made the contraception mandate the first detail of Obamacare to be truly “felt.” He was willing to risk that it would rouse religious leaders because he knew it would rouse those who would perceive opposition to the mandate as a threat to consequence-free sex. It’s not — with or without the mandate, any two consenting adults are free to have sex and with contraception as much as they can afford — but don’t tell Sandra Fluke that. To her and to others like her, sex is apparently not consequence-free unless it’s also flat-out “free” for the folks having it.

The best bet for conservatives is to try — somehow — to rise above this fray and to espouse a higher, better way. That necessarily entails advocating conscience protections for religious employers and patiently, repeatedly explaining that contraception is widely accessible and affordable, but not a medical necessity. It might also entail (and I duck as I write this) the willingness to love women (and men!) by inviting them to lives as something other than moochers who can’t see past their own desires for instant gratification. “Hey, kids, try a life of personal responsibility and earned success! You might like it!”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Wrong again. Fluke is about women having sex at someone else’s expense. And that is not just about creating babies or not. What comes from these women’s indiscretions are much more expensive health care issues that they will never be rid of. You and Ms. Fluke know that that $3000 she quoted are the contraceptives ($1000 tops) and the STD’s and the care for what’s going on between their legs and their ears every year they carry on with their shenanigans.Just stop and control yourselves and the men will follow suit.

Today, he did that with a rare personal phone call to Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown law student who earlier this week testified in support of the mandate by saying that she and her peers are “going broke” to buy birth control.

1.) Was this a fluke?
2.) As a first year law student, why does she have so much time on her hands?
3.) Why should we support her immediate gratification?
4.) Don’t forget, Miss Fluke is looking forward to her TENS of THOUSAND$ in student loans being forgiven by her patrón, the “Long-Legged Mack Daddy” and “his stash”.

So, as it turns out, this is just another dog and pony show put on by the liberals in Congress. They are famous for this stuff. Always finding some activist claiming to be a victim, to appear in front of a committee and tell them how bad things are because of conservatives and the church. All it’s meant to do is deflect attention away from Obama’s horrible record. Nothing more. Truly pathetic.

Not much to go on there, is there? But, vicious bigots like you and Rush are more interested in girding yourself in righteous indignation and passing judgment, apparently in some sad attempt to justify your own pointless lives.

urban elitist on March 3, 2012 at 7:24 AM

I think I was among the first to criticize Rush on this.

He could have argued the core issue of federally mandated coverage, but couldn’t resist the sex aspect of this. He hasn’t a clue how birth control works, nor does he know anything about this woman. The pill taken monthly to prevent pregnancy works regardless of how much sex you have.

All this does is make him look like a buzzkill and a jerk. Where many young people agree with fiscal conservatism, they will shut that out immediately once they hear the kind of comments posted on this site. This is why Conservatives do not get young people to their side.

According to a bio on Georgetown’s website, Fluke’s professional background is in domestic violence and human trafficking advocacy. At Georgetown law, she is the former president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, an editor for the Journal of Gender and the Law, and vice president of the Women’s Legal Alliance. She has a bachelor’s degree in Feminist, Gender & Sexuality studies from Cornell.

petefrt on March 3, 2012 at 8:15 AM

That says it all right there. Nothing but a smoke screen to garner sympathy for an issue that doesn’t exist.

The pill taken monthly to prevent pregnancy works regardless of how much sex you have.

antisense on March 3, 2012 at 8:59 AM

The pill taken monthly will cost you about $120 a year in the Georgetown area. Either Fluke wasn’t talking about the pill, or she was lying about the $1,000 a year cost. Rush, like many others, assumed she was being truthful–meaning she wasn’t talking about the pill.

All this does is make him look like a buzzkill and a jerk. Where many young people agree with fiscal conservatism, they will shut that out immediately once they hear the kind of comments posted on this site. This is why Conservatives do not get young people to their side.

antisense on March 3, 2012 at 8:59 AM

To whom? Libs like you? Young Conservtives are the majority down here in the Heartland.

Limbaugh was foolish to call the woman names. And yes, I’m well aware that the left called Sarah Palin (and her young daughters) far worse. But there is no need for conservatives to stoop to that level. Limbaugh could have pointed out the idiocy of the woman’s position without resorting to vulgar ad hominems.

AZCoyote on March 3, 2012 at 8:00 AM

Exactly. Whether or not Rush’s point was correct or not, he was wrong to use a vulgar term to describe a person with whom he disagreed. It was a rare unforced error on Rush’s part. Already it has benefited the Dems enormously – I read today that two of Rush’s sponsors will no longer advertise on his show. While I’m sure that he can replace them, the public relations damage is tremendous, and it directly impacts the Republican Party, which Rush claims to support.

Sandra Fluke reminds me of a cheap carnival ride, and liberals are offended?

I guess that pay per view bedroom cam venture wasn’t working out for her.

Roy Rogers on March 3, 2012 at 8:44 AM

She looks a lot like Monica Slewinsky. I see a gubmint job in her future.
Hell, I’D pay for her contraception just to keep her from breeding.
Cigars are your best friend, Sandy. Just axe BillyJeff.
~(Ä)~

As usual this isn`t adding up. Thirty year old,first year law student are you telling me it took her twelve years to get a Bachelors degree? Yea ,I bet her parents are proud. Distract and deflect its the same MO different day. Sad part is for a large part of population it works.They hear a sound bite and run off half cocked.

Exactly. Whether or not Rush’s point was correct or not, he was wrong to use a vulgar term to describe a person with whom he disagreed. It was a rare unforced error on Rush’s part. Already it has benefited the Dems enormously – I read today that two of Rush’s sponsors will no longer advertise on his show. While I’m sure that he can replace them, the public relations damage is tremendous, and it directly impacts the Republican Party, which Rush claims to support.

This is why Conservatives do not get young people to their side.
antisense on March 3, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Yes because as adults we demand order and responsibility, not chaos and bad behavior. Ms. Fluke (who’s 30 by the way and hardly a kid)advocates the latter with the extra added insult of asking us to pay for it.,,you know, like she’s entitled. No.

Not much to go on there, is there? But, vicious bigots like you and Rush are more interested in girding yourself in righteous indignation and passing judgment, apparently in some sad attempt to justify your own pointless lives.

urban elitist on March 3, 2012 at 7:24 AM

I’m sorry that you are so deeply offended that someone uttered the absolute, descriptive truth. Although she may not be having the sex herself she has boldly ask the American taxpayer to get screwed.

Well Fluke you, outraged pretender, you pay for their entertainment and leave us out of it.

Yes because as adults we demand order and responsibility, not chaos and bad behavior. Ms. Fluke (who’s 30 by the way and hardly a kid)advocates the latter with the extra added insult of asking us to pay for it.,,you know, like she’s entitled. No.

gracie on March 3, 2012 at 9:18 AM

OK, I do not disagree that we should not be paying for other people’s crap – I do not care what it is!

I do not like insurance in general, because it is socialized! I do not want to pay for people’s viagra. Nor “diabetus” medication because they decided to be fat.

Rush could have made a reasoned and intelligent point on this issue. What he did didn’t help anyone. He lost supporters and Democrats raised money. You got a cheap thrill out of calling someone you never met a slut.

Sandra Fluke will, about two months from now, wonder what happened when she finds herself having been kicked to the cube by the liberals, in favor of the next “Outrage-of-the-Day”. Her fifteen-minutes-of-fame will not carry much past the $4.50 level of gasoline, when it is reached.

No one is in any -dire- need of contraceptives. This woman -should- be laughed out in the public square for going before Congress and begging that someone else pay so she (and her cohorts) can go on having a responsibility-free college experience at prestigious law schools.

How pathetic do you have to be to be a progressive?

My furnace died the other day so I’m going to have to shell out much more than $1000 to replace it….and if I don’t, my family could freeze. So, Im in much more dire need of assistance than this fool.

I suppose I’ll go next and cry before congress that it’s a big injustice that home insurance policies aren’t mandated to cover furnace repair/replacment……but then again, Im not a weak pathetic progressive and I’ll take responsibility for myself and get it done on my own.

No one is in any -dire- need of contraceptives. This woman -should- be laughed out in the public square for going before Congress and begging that someone else pay so she (and her cohorts) can go on having a responsibility-free college experience at prestigious law schools.

How pathetic do you have to be to be a progressive?

My furnace died the other day so I’m going to have to shell out much more than $1000 to replace it….and if I don’t, my family could freeze. So, Im in much more dire need of assistance than this fool.

Exactly. This is what should have happened, but it didn’t because Rush bungled a golden opportunity for humor so badly.

99.99999999999% of the American population would have never known that fluke appeared before congress.

tom daschle concerned on March 3, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Precisely. But as chronicled here more often than not, TruCons would rather lose in a Quixotic Crusade than actually govern the nation.

You aren’t going to win people over by calling them sluts. All it does is create an easy opportunity for Dems to score (lol) political points. WE are completely right about the argument. but life isn’t fair guys. Sorry.

Precisely. But as chronicled here more often than not, TruCons would rather lose in a Quixotic Crusade than actually govern the nation.

You aren’t going to win people over by calling them sluts. All it does is create an easy opportunity for Dems to score (lol) political points. WE are completely right about the argument. but life isn’t fair guys. Sorry.

antisense on March 3, 2012 at 9:52 AM

I am so glad I have losers like you on my side willing to give the left, WHO HATE OUR GUTS, absolute control over the narrative, debate, and language.

Second, hit yourself in the head with all 2000 pages of the Obamacare bill until you understand Rush’s point. I think he brilliantly illustrated the absurdity of the whole issue and was right to bring it to light.

Oh no, think of all those poor trees. Remember, it was man who got rid of all those non-functional trees and built the greatest highway system the world has ever known ( love the nick, by the way).
Seriously, I don’t think they care. As much as they cry about rights, I think the only ones they are concerned about are their own.

You aren’t going to win people over by calling Conservative women names. All it does is create an easy opportunity for Repubs to score (lol) political points. WE are completely right about the argument. but life isn’t fair guys. Sorry.

I am so glad I have losers like you on my side willing to give the left, WHO HATE OUR GUTS, absolute control over the narrative, debate, and language.

tom daschle concerned on March 3, 2012 at 9:59 AM

You are the poster who regularly posts bigoted, anti-Mormon trash. In your comments you regularly sink to the lowest common demoninator. I don’t think you are in any position to be preaching about the use of language.

You aren’t going to win people over by calling them sluts. All it does is create an easy opportunity for Dems to score (lol) political points. WE are completely right about the argument. but life isn’t fair guys. Sorry.

antisense on March 3, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Exactly. Rush should have been a lot smarter. He gave the Obama campaign a huge present here.

Exactly. Rush should have been a lot smarter. He gave the Obama campaign a huge present here.

bluegill on March 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

The woman is a plant. That“sweet little co-ed” has turned out to be a 30 year old “Women’s Right’s” (i.e., Abortion) Activist, who entered Georgetown, a Catholic University, with a dual purpose: to achieve notoriety and advance her political ideology.

You want to pay for her Liberal Agenda? You go ahead. Me? Here’s two aspirin, Sandra. Hold on to them. Tightly.

What’s surprising is the shock some women up-thread have expressed at men’s attitude on this subject.

Did you really believe that men somehow, deep down respected you for engaging in premarital sex with them? Or that a woman who had multiple sexual partners was somehow equal to a woman who did not?

I would call the latter courageous, strong and principled. Not the converse. Especially when the former tries to diminish the rights of those who don’t share their deviant values by forcing them to participate in it. That’s a sickening, un-American betrayal of conscience and rights.

Exactly. Rush should have been a lot smarter. He gave the Obama campaign a huge present here.

bluegill on March 3, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Remember when Rush said he was being absurd to illustrate absurdity and then the left took a little soundbite to make it sound like he was being super-serial and then the squishes that call themselves conservatives bought the lefty narrative?

Good times.

You cant compromise with these people and it would do you all a lot of good to accept that.

I know conservatives have very little use for the truth, particularly when it contradicts their smug prejudices or atavistic fears, but neither Rush Limbaugh nor you know a d**m thing about Fluke’s sex life. This is what she testified:
“Without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary.”
Not much to go on there, is there? But, vicious bigots like you and Rush are more interested in girding yourself in righteous indignation and passing judgment, apparently in some sad attempt to justify your own pointless lives.
urban elitist on March 3, 2012 at 7:24 AM

The woman is a plant. That“sweet little co-ed” has turned out to be a 30 year old “Women’s Right’s” (i.e., Abortion) Activist, who entered Georgetown, a Catholic University, with a dual purpose: to achieve notoriety and advance her political ideology.

You want to pay for her Liberal Agenda? You go ahead. Me? Here’s two aspirin, Sandra. Hold on to them. Tightly.

kingsjester on March 3, 2012 at 10:06

Not sure what 30 has to do with anything. The way you say things is important in business and in life. For instance, you do not ask a girl out, (which could be taken as a compliment), by staring at her chest and scratching your butt.

You insincere and disingenuous bloated spleen. You serve no point. You have no point. You are advancing the radical left’s narrative for them.

You could fight the narrative by talking about the important issues surrounding this story, but no, you have conceded defeat, and chosen to take out someone who advocates for free markets and individual liberty 3 hours a day, 5 days a week.

I hope you suffer immensely under the crushing socialist regime that we are forever burdened with.

She should have had more self respect and personal regard for herself than to make her sex life a public discussion. Obama should have more self respect for himself and personal regard for this gal than to exacerbate the situation for votes. She I can forgive on the grounds of youth and stupidity, him????? He has no excuse for using her to push his agenda. The man has no scruples whatsoever. One has to wonder if he would have been so eager had it been one of his own.

How come we are supposed to pay for “rights” that are not actually enumerated in the constitution, but I am forced to buy my own guns and ammo in order to excersise a right that actually is. Should not the government be providing me with the arms I choose and sufficient ammunition that I may become proficient in this right? I find that the high cost of ammo and guns is a financial hardship for me. I believe it would save the government money if I am able to become proficient in my 2nd amendment rights, if I were to ever encounter a hostile situation and am properly trained, I will not wind up winging numerous innocent bystanders and be able to hit the actual targets. That would be a win win for the government as no court costs for the bad guy and no hospital bills for the bystanders. So, in closing, the government can provide me with my guns and ammo now for future potential savings or pay more later.

You cant compromise with these people and it would do you all a lot of good to accept that.

Spliff Menendez on March 3, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Funny how Sean Hannity, Ed Morrissey, Allahpundit, Bill O’Reilly, Michael Medved, etc. have all been able to criticize Obamacare without calling people sluts.

Rush should have been smarter with how he went about it.

At this point it doesn’t even matter that Rush was right in principle. How you say things DOES matter. Rush obscured the real issue by choosing the most explosive, dumb way to criticize the woman.

Rush should suck it up and apologize. I don’t care if his ego is bruised. I don’t care if he means it or not. I don’t care if he’s afraid of appearing to his listeners that he is backing down or giving in. That’s all less important than minimizing any political benefit to Obama. Let’s get this sideshow behind us and move on to real issues (e.g., Obama’s economic failures, unemployment, jobs, etc.)

You could fight the narrative by talking about the important issues surrounding this story, but no, you have conceded defeat, and chosen to take out someone who advocates for free markets and individual liberty 3 hours a day, 5 days a week.

I hope you suffer immensely under the crushing socialist regime that we are forever burdened with.

tom daschle concerned on March 3, 2012 at 10:17 AM

Que? I want him to advocate the core issues. Rush always says gun control is not about guns, it is about control. Healthcare is not about care, it is about control.

When it comes to birth control, he decides to make it all about some lady and her sex life, into which he has no insight unless he also happens to moonlight as God. This birth control issue is not about sex, it is about control. Rush compromised his ability to intelligently articulate the fiscally responsible angle here.

The woman is a plant. That“sweet little co-ed” has turned out to be a 30 year old “Women’s Right’s” (i.e., Abortion) Activist, who entered Georgetown, a Catholic University, with a dual purpose: to achieve notoriety and advance her political ideology.

You want to pay for her Liberal Agenda? You go ahead. Me? Here’s two aspirin, Sandra. Hold on to them. Tightly.

kingsjester on March 3, 2012 at 10:06 AM

Ya nailed it.
Plumbing new depths, the Left is once again playing the “womens’ health care rights” card. I mean really, who should give a flyin’ flock what she thinks we should pay for? Hell, we already subsidize her education.
Methinks that the femisogynist hath carnal knowledge of zee pooch.
~(Ä)~

Rush should suck it up and apologize. I don’t care if his ego is bruised. I don’t care if he means it or not. I don’t care if he’s afraid of appearing to his listeners that he is backing down or giving in. That’s all less important than minimizing any political benefit to Obama. Let’s get this sideshow behind us and move on to real issues (e.g., Obama’s economic failures, unemployment, jobs, etc.)

bluegill on March 3, 2012 at 10:26 AM

NO. He should not. Obama should apologize for trying to force Catholic Institutions to obey him instead of following their faith.

That woman is a 30 year old promiscuous professional Activist, masquerading as a student.

Proud of a Porn Star?! She has proved one thing – Anyone hiring her after graduation risks law suits, i.e. law suit after law suit. Well, unless it’s some pimp, brothel or porn movie doing the hiring. If she goes the pimp route, he ain’t going to take much of her crap before giving her a good thrashing.

I love how the drive by media is trying to make this “young lady” who is 30 yrs old as some sort of innocent virgin,(which is something she is NOT) The democRATS & they’re corrupt media want a communist state, it’s really that simple.
Rush is right, if i’m going 2 pay for it, i want to see it.